%% This BibTeX bibliography file was created using BibDesk.
%% https://bibdesk.sourceforge.io/

%% Created for Erik Loualiche at 2020-09-29 18:11:31 -0500 


%% Saved with string encoding Unicode (UTF-8) 

@techreport{McNichol:2020:StateShortfallEstimate,
	Author = {McNichol, Elizabeth and Leachman, Michael},
	Institution = {Center on Budget and Policy Priorities},
	Title = {States Continue to Face Large Shortfalls due to COVID-19 Effects},
	Type = {Mimeo},
	Year = {2020}}

@techreport{Whitaker:2020:LocalGovHelp,
	Author = {Stephan D. Whitaker},
	Date-Added = {2020-09-29 17:55:31 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2020-09-29 17:56:24 -0500},
	Institution = {Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland},
	Title = {How Much Help Do State and Local Governments Need? Updated Estimates of Revenue Losses from Pandemic Mitigation},
	Type = {Mimeo},
	Year = {2020}}

@article{GordonReber:2020:SchoolDistrict,
	Author = {Gordon, Nora and Reber, Sarah},
	Date-Added = {2020-09-29 17:52:55 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2020-09-29 17:52:55 -0500},
	Journal = {National Tax Journal},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {781--804},
	Title = {Federal Aid to School Districts during the COVID-19 Recession},
	Volume = {73},
	Year = {2020}}

@article{Gordon_al:2020:StateLocalCovid,
	Author = {Gordon, Tracy and Dadayan, Lucy and Rueben, Kim},
	Date-Added = {2020-09-29 17:50:43 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2020-09-29 17:50:43 -0500},
	Journal = {National Tax Journal},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {733--758},
	Title = {State and Local Government Finances in the COVID-19 Era},
	Volume = {73},
	Year = {2020}}

@article{ClemensVeuger:2020:StateCovid,
	Author = {Clemens, Jeffrey and Veuger, Stan},
	Date-Added = {2020-09-29 17:40:28 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2020-09-29 17:40:28 -0500},
	Journal = {National Tax Journal},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {619--644},
	Title = {Implications of the COVID-19 Pandemic for State Government Tax Revenues},
	Volume = {73},
	Year = {2020}}

@article{Chernick_al:2020:CovidCities,
	Author = {Chernick, Howard and Copeland, David and Reschovsky, Andrew},
	Date-Added = {2020-09-29 17:39:03 -0500},
	Date-Modified = {2020-09-29 17:39:03 -0500},
	Journal = {National Tax Journal},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {699--732},
	Publisher = {National Tax Association},
	Title = {The Fiscal Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on cities: An Initial Assessment},
	Volume = {73},
	Year = {2020}}

@misc{CRS_Cares,
	Author = {Driessen, Grant},
	Note = {Retrieved from Congressional Research Service website \url{https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46298} (accessed September 22, 2020)},
	Number = {(CRS Report No. R46298)},
	Title = {The Coronavirus Relief Fund (CARES Act, Title V): Background and State and Local Data},
	Year = {2020}}

@techreport{Schoag2017,
	Author = {Shoag, Daniel and Tuttle, Cody and Veuger, Stan},
	Month = {August},
	Number = {2017-15},
	Series = {AEI Economics Working Paper},
	Title = {Rules versus Home Rule: Local Government Responses to Negative Revenue Shocks},
	Type = {Working Paper},
	Year = {2017}}

@techreport{NCSL:2010:BalancedBudget,
	Address = {Washington D.C.},
	Author = {{National Conference of State Legislatures}},
	Date-Added = {2020-07-14 22:15:57 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-07-14 22:21:43 -0400},
	Institution = {NCSL},
	Title = {State Balanced Budget Provisions},
	Year = {2010}}

@techreport{GMYZ_PPP,
	Abstract = {This paper takes an early look at the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), a large and novel small business support program that was part of the initial policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We use new data on the distribution of the first round of PPP loans and high-frequency micro-level employment data to consider two dimensions of program targeting. First, we do not find evidence that funds flowed to areas more adversely affected by the economic effects of the pandemic, as measured by declines in hours worked or business shutdowns. If anything, funds flowed to areas less hard hit. Second, we find significant heterogeneity across banks in terms of disbursing PPP funds, which does not only reflect differences in underlying loan demand. The top-4 banks alone account for 36% of total pre-policy small business loans, but disbursed less than 3% of all PPP loans in the first round. Areas that were significantly more exposed to low-PPP banks received much lower loan allocations. We do not find evidence that the PPP had a substantial effect on local economic outcomes---including declines in hours worked, business shutdowns, initial unemployment insurance claims, and small business revenues---during the first round of the program. Firms appear to use first round funds to build up savings and meet loan and other commitments, which points to possible medium-run impacts. As data become available, we will continue to study employment and establishment responses to the program and the impact of PPP support on the economic recovery. Measuring these responses is critical for evaluating the social insurance value of the PPP and similar policies.},
	Author = {Granja, Jo{\~a}o and Makridis, Christos and Yannelis, Constantine and Zwick, Eric},
	Doi = {10.3386/w27095},
	Institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research},
	Month = {May},
	Number = {27095},
	Series = {Working Paper Series},
	Title = {Did the Paycheck Protection Program Hit the Target?},
	Type = {Working Paper},
	Url = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27095},
	Year = {2020},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27095},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.3386/w27095}}

@techreport{Kahn_al:2020:LaborCovid,
	Abstract = {We use job vacancy data collected in real time by Burning Glass Technologies, as well as initial unemployment insurance (UI) claims data to study the impact of COVID-19 on the labor market. Our data allow us to track postings at disaggregated geography and by detailed occupation and industry. We find that job vacancies collapsed in the second half of March and are now 30% lower than their level at the beginning of the year. To a first approximation, this collapse was broad based, hitting all U.S. states, regardless of the intensity of the initial virus spread or timing of stay-at-home policies. UI claims also largely match these patterns. Nearly all industries and occupations saw contraction in postings and spikes in UI claims, regardless of whether they are deemed essential and whether they have work-from-home capability. The only major exceptions are in essential retail and nursing, the ``front line'' jobs most in-demand during the current crisis.},
	Author = {Kahn, Lisa B and Lange, Fabian and Wiczer, David G},
	Date-Added = {2020-07-14 11:07:58 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-07-14 11:08:15 -0400},
	Doi = {10.3386/w27061},
	Institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research},
	Month = {April},
	Number = {27061},
	Series = {Working Paper Series},
	Title = {Labor Demand in the Time of COVID-19: Evidence from Vacancy Postings and UI Claims},
	Type = {Working Paper},
	Url = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27061},
	Year = {2020},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27061},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.3386/w27061}}

@techreport{Cajner_al:2020:LaborCovid,
	Abstract = {Using weekly, anonymized administrative payroll data from the largest U.S. payroll processing company, we measure the evolution of the U.S. labor market during the first three months of the global COVID-19 pandemic. After aggregate employment fell by 21 percent through late-April, we highlight a modest employment rebound through late-May. The re-opening of temporarily shuttered businesses contributed significantly to the employment rebound, particularly for smaller businesses. We show that worker recall has been an important component of recent employment gains for both re-opening and continuing businesses. Employment losses have been concentrated disproportionately among lower wage workers; as of late May employment for workers in the lowest wage quintile was still 30 percent lower relative to mid-February levels. As a result, average base wages increased by over 5 percent between February and May, though this increase arose entirely through a composition effect. Finally, we document that businesses have cut nominal wages for about 10 percent of continuing employees while forgoing regularly scheduled wage increases for others.},
	Author = {Cajner, Tomaz and Crane, Leland D and Decker, Ryan A and Grigsby, John and Hamins-Puertolas, Adrian and Hurst, Erik and Kurz, Christopher and Yildirmaz, Ahu},
	Date-Added = {2020-07-14 11:07:15 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-07-14 11:07:37 -0400},
	Doi = {10.3386/w27159},
	Institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research},
	Month = {May},
	Number = {27159},
	Series = {Working Paper Series},
	Title = {The U.S. Labor Market during the Beginning of the Pandemic Recession},
	Type = {Working Paper},
	Url = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27159},
	Year = {2020},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27159},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.3386/w27159}}

@article{Chodorow:2019:CSMultipliers,
	Author = {Chodorow-Reich, Gabriel},
	Date-Added = {2020-07-14 10:45:58 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-07-14 10:45:58 -0400},
	Doi = {10.1257/pol.20160465},
	Journal = {American Economic Journal: Economic Policy},
	Month = {May},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {1-34},
	Title = {Geographic Cross-Sectional Fiscal Spending Multipliers: What Have We Learned?},
	Volume = {11},
	Year = {2019},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.20160465},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20160465}}

@techreport{Liebersohn2020,
	Author = {Erel, Isil and Liebersohn, Jack},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-25 12:24:25 -0400},
	Institution = {The Ohio State University},
	Number = {2020-03-016},
	Series = {Fisher College of Business Working Paper Series},
	Title = {FinTech Substitute for Banks? Evidence from the Paycheck Protection Program},
	Type = {Working Paper},
	Year = {2020}}

@article{Baicker_al:2012:RiseStates,
	Abstract = {One of the most dramatic changes in the fiscal federalism landscape during the postwar period has been the rapid growth in state budgets, which almost tripled as a share of GDP and doubled as a share of government spending between 1952 and 2006. We argue that the greater role of states cannot be easily explained by changes in Tiebout forces of fiscal competition, such as mobility and voting patterns, and are not accounted for by demographic or income trends. Rather, we demonstrate that much of the growth in state budgets has been driven by changes in intergovernmental interactions. Restricted federal grants to states have increased, and federal policy and legal constraints have also mandated or heavily incentivized state own-source spending, particularly in the areas of education, health and public welfare. These outside pressures moderate the forces of fiscal competition and must be taken into account when assessing the implications of observed revenue and spending patterns.},
	Author = {Katherine Baicker and Jeffrey Clemens and Monica Singhal},
	Date-Added = {2020-07-07 17:47:58 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-07-07 17:47:58 -0400},
	Doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.05.011},
	Issn = {0047-2727},
	Journal = {Journal of Public Economics},
	Keywords = {Fiscal federalism, Tiebout, Decentralization, Intergovernmental grants, Intergovernmental mandates},
	Note = {Fiscal Federalism},
	Number = {11},
	Pages = {1079 - 1091},
	Title = {The rise of the states: U.S. fiscal decentralization in the postwar period},
	Volume = {96},
	Year = {2012},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272711000831},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.05.011}}

@article{Shoag:2013:StatePension,
	Author = {Shoag, Daniel},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-25 12:22:14 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-25 12:22:14 -0400},
	Doi = {10.1257/aer.103.3.121},
	Journal = {American Economic Review},
	Month = {May},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {121-24},
	Title = {Using State Pension Shocks to Estimate Fiscal Multipliers since the Great Recession},
	Volume = {103},
	Year = {2013},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.103.3.121},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.3.121}}

@techreport{Shoag:2013:WP,
	Author = {Shoag, Daniel},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-25 12:21:54 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-25 12:24:25 -0400},
	Institution = {Harvard Kennedy School},
	Title = {The Impact of Government Spending Shocks: Evidence on the Multiplier from State Pension Plan Returns},
	Year = {2020},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.103.3.121},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.3.121}}

@techreport{SuarezWingender:2016:LocalMultiplier,
	Author = {Juan Carlos {Su\'arez Serrato} and Philippe Wingender},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-25 12:18:45 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-25 12:19:13 -0400},
	Doi = {10.3386/w22425},
	Institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research},
	Month = {July},
	Number = {22425},
	Series = {Working Paper Series},
	Title = {Estimating Local Fiscal Multipliers},
	Type = {Working Paper},
	Year = {2016},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w22425},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.3386/w22425}}

@article{Wilson:2012:LocalMultiplier,
	Author = {Wilson, Daniel J.},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-25 12:17:47 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-25 12:17:47 -0400},
	Doi = {10.1257/pol.4.3.251},
	Journal = {American Economic Journal: Economic Policy},
	Month = {April},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {251-82},
	Title = {Fiscal Spending Jobs Multipliers: Evidence from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act},
	Volume = {4},
	Year = {2012},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.4.3.251},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.4.3.251}}

@article{Chodorow_al:2012:StateFiscal,
	Author = {Chodorow-Reich, Gabriel and Feiveson, Laura and Liscow, Zachary and Woolston, William Gui},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-24 17:24:25 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-24 17:24:25 -0400},
	Doi = {10.1257/pol.4.3.118},
	Journal = {American Economic Journal: Economic Policy},
	Month = {April},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {118-45},
	Title = {Does State Fiscal Relief during Recessions Increase Employment? Evidence from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act},
	Volume = {4},
	Year = {2012},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.4.3.118},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.4.3.118}}

@article{HouSmith:2010:BBR,
	Abstract = {Balanced budget requirements (BBRs) affect all aspects of financial operations. Previous studies relied on characterizations that highlight a constitutional-statutory distinction. Hou and Smith (Public Budgeting \& Finance 26(3):22--45, 2006) instead propose a political-technical construct. This article uses probit estimation, six measures of balance, and long panels to test which framework offers more explanatory power. The findings suggest that BBRs matter to varying degrees. Technical requirements exert bigger effects than political ones, the effects are more obvious on narrower than broader measures of balance and in the later phases of the budget cycle, and the political-technical construct offers more explanatory power than the constitutional-statutory distinction.},
	Author = {Hou, Yilin and Smith, Daniel L.},
	Da = {2010/10/01},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-19 11:23:22 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-19 11:23:22 -0400},
	Doi = {10.1007/s11127-009-9528-6},
	Id = {Hou2010},
	Isbn = {1573-7101},
	Journal = {Public Choice},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {57--79},
	Title = {Do State Balanced Budget Requirements Matter? Testing Two Explanatory Frameworks},
	Ty = {JOUR},
	Volume = {145},
	Year = {2010},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-009-9528-6}}

@misc{IPUM_CPS:2020:Microdata,
	Author = {Sarah Flood and Miriam King and Renae Rodgers and Steven Ruggles and J. Robert Warren},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-12 17:34:30 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-12 17:34:30 -0400},
	Doi = {https://doi.org/10.18128/D030.V7.0},
	Howpublished = {Minneapolis, MN: IPUMS},
	Title = {Integrated Public Use Microdata Series, Current Population Survey: Version 7.0 [dataset]},
	Year = {2020},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.18128/D030.V7.0}}

@article{Poterba:1995:CapitalBudgets,
	Abstract = {This paper compares the level and composition of government spending in U.S. states that maintain separate budgets for capital and operating expenditures with that in states that employ unified budgets. It also investigates the effects of pay-as-you-go financing rules for capital projects. The empirical findings suggest that states with separate capital budgets spend more on public capital projects than comparable states with unified budgets. There is no evidence that the presence or absence of a capital budget affects the level of non-capital spending. Pay-as-you-go requirements for financing capital projects are associated with lower levels of both capital and non-capital spending.},
	Author = {James M. Poterba},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-05 18:26:38 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-05 18:26:38 -0400},
	Doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(94)01431-M},
	Issn = {0047-2727},
	Journal = {Journal of Public Economics},
	Keywords = {Government budgeting, Infrastructure, Political institutions},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {165 - 187},
	Title = {Capital budgets, borrowing rules, and state capital spending},
	Url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/004727279401431M},
	Volume = {56},
	Year = {1995},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/004727279401431M},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(94)01431-M}}

@article{Poterba:1995:BudgetRules,
	Author = {James M. Poterba},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-05 18:25:24 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-05 18:25:24 -0400},
	Issn = {00280283, 19447477},
	Journal = {National Tax Journal},
	Number = {3},
	Pages = {329--336},
	Publisher = {National Tax Association},
	Title = {Balanced Budget Rules and Fiscal Policy: Evidence from the States},
	Url = {http://www.jstor.org/stable/41789150},
	Volume = {48},
	Year = {1995},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.jstor.org/stable/41789150}}

@article{Poterba:1994:FiscalCrises,
	Abstract = {This paper explores the dynamics of state taxes and spending during the late 1980s, when regional economic downturns and increased expenditure demands led to substantial state budget deficits. More restrictive state fiscal institutions, such as "no-deficit-carryover" rules and tax and expenditure limitations, are correlated with more rapid fiscal adjustment to unexpected deficits. Political factors are also important. When a single party controls the state house and the governorship, deficit adjustment is much faster than when party control is divided. In gubernatorial election years, tax increases and spending cuts are both significantly smaller than at other times.},
	Author = {James M. Poterba},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-05 18:22:18 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-05 18:22:18 -0400},
	Issn = {00223808, 1537534X},
	Journal = {Journal of Political Economy},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {799--821},
	Publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
	Title = {State Responses to Fiscal Crises: The Effects of Budgetary Institutions and Politics},
	Url = {http://www.jstor.org/stable/2138765},
	Volume = {102},
	Year = {1994},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.jstor.org/stable/2138765}}

@article{ClemensMiran:2012:LocalFiscalMult,
	Author = {Clemens, Jeffrey and Miran, Stephen},
	Date-Added = {2020-06-05 18:19:23 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-05 18:19:23 -0400},
	Doi = {10.1257/pol.4.2.46},
	Journal = {American Economic Journal: Economic Policy},
	Month = {May},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {46-68},
	Title = {Fiscal Policy Multipliers on Subnational Government Spending},
	Url = {https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.4.2.46},
	Volume = {4},
	Year = {2012},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.4.2.46},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.4.2.46}}

@misc{CovidUSState:2020:BU,
	Author = {J. Raifman and Nocka K. and Jones D. and Bor J. and Lipson S. and Jay J. and Chan P.},
	Date-Added = {2020-05-26 08:41:50 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-06-12 17:37:41 -0400},
	Doi = {https://doi.org/10.18128/D030.V7.0},
	Howpublished = {Boston, MA: BU},
	Title = {COVID-19 US state policy database.},
	Year = {2020},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.18128/D030.V7.0}}

@techreport{Fairlie_al:2020:C19MinorityEmp,
	Abstract = {COVID-19 abruptly impacted the labor market with the unemployment rate jumping to 14.7 percent less than two months after state governments began adopting social distancing measures. Unemployment of this magnitude has not been seen since the Great Depression. This paper provides the first study of how the pandemic impacted minority unemployment using CPS microdata through April 2020. African-Americans experienced an increase in unemployment to 16.6 percent, less than anticipated based on previous recessions. In contrast, Latinx, with an unemployment rate of 18.2 percent, were disproportionately hard hit by COVID-19. Adjusting for concerns of the BLS regarding misclassification of unemployment, we create an upper-bound measure of the national unemployment rate of 26.5 percent, which is higher than the peak observed in the Great Depression. The April 2020 upper-bound unemployment rates are an alarming 31.8 percent for blacks and 31.4 percent for Latinx. Difference-in-difference estimates suggest that blacks were, at most, only slightly disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. Non-linear decomposition estimates indicate that a slightly favorable industry distribution partly protected them from being hit harder by COVID-19. The most impacted group are Latinx. Difference-in-difference estimates unequivocally indicate that Latinx were disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. An unfavorable occupational distribution and lower skills contributed to why Latinx experienced much higher unemployment rates than whites.  These findings of early impacts of COVID-19 on unemployment raise important concerns about long-term economic effects for minorities.},
	Author = {Fairlie, Robert W and Couch, Kenneth and Xu, Huanan},
	Date-Added = {2020-05-25 10:42:20 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-05-25 10:42:49 -0400},
	Doi = {10.3386/w27246},
	Institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research},
	Month = {May},
	Number = {27246},
	Series = {Working Paper Series},
	Title = {The Impacts of COVID-19 on Minority Unemployment: First Evidence from April 2020 CPS Microdata},
	Type = {Working Paper},
	Url = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27246},
	Year = {2020},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27246},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.3386/w27246}}

@article{Caroll_Johnson:2010:DiversificationFiscal,
	Abstract = {How diversified are small town revenues? Revenue diversification is analyzed among towns governed by town meetings. Using previously developed diversification measures, the findings confirm that these localities draw from less diverse revenue streams than other state and local governments. The reasons for these variations include differences in home rule status as well as tax and expenditure limitations imposed by states. The authors suggest that revenue allocation in these jurisdictions is substantively different from other forms of local government because these communities rely much less on sales taxation than states and municipalities. Their essay proposes possible options for improvement, along with other criteria by which small towns can assess their revenue diversification.},
	Author = {Carroll, Deborah A. and Johnson, Terri},
	Date-Added = {2020-05-24 20:46:18 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-05-24 20:46:18 -0400},
	Doi = {10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02129.x},
	Eprint = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02129.x},
	Journal = {Public Administration Review},
	Number = {2},
	Pages = {223-235},
	Title = {Examining Small Town Revenues: To What Extent Are They Diversified?},
	Url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02129.x},
	Volume = {70},
	Year = {2010},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02129.x},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02129.x}}

@article{Alt_Lowry:1994:DividedGov,
	Author = {Alt, James E. and Lowry, Robert C.},
	Date-Added = {2020-05-24 20:38:09 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-05-24 20:38:09 -0400},
	Doi = {10.2307/2082709},
	Journal = {American Political Science Review},
	Number = {4},
	Pages = {811--828},
	Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	Title = {Divided Government, Fiscal Institutions, and Budget Deficits: Evidence from the States},
	Volume = {88},
	Year = {1994},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.2307/2082709}}

@article{Fatas_Mihov:2006:FiscalRules,
	Abstract = {Fiscal policy restrictions are often criticized for limiting the ability of governments to react to business cycle fluctuations and, consequently, the adoption of quantitative restrictions is viewed as inevitably leading to increased macroeconomic volatility. In this paper, we use data from 48 US states to investigate how budget rules affect fiscal policy outcomes. Our key findings are that (1) strict budgetary restrictions lead to lower policy volatility (i.e. less aggressive use of discretion in conducting fiscal policy) and (2) fiscal restrictions reduce the responsiveness of fiscal policy to output shocks. These two results should have opposite effects on output volatility. While less discretion should reduce volatility, less responsiveness of fiscal policy might amplify business cycles. We provide empirical support for the first effect: restrictions, by reducing discretion in fiscal policy, can reduce macroeconomic volatility.},
	Author = {Antonio Fat{\'a}s and Ilian Mihov},
	Date-Added = {2020-05-24 20:01:03 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-05-24 20:01:03 -0400},
	Doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.02.005},
	Issn = {0047-2727},
	Journal = {Journal of Public Economics},
	Keywords = {Fiscal policy, Business cycles, Fiscal rules},
	Number = {1},
	Pages = {101 - 117},
	Title = {The macroeconomic effects of fiscal rules in the US states},
	Url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272705000435},
	Volume = {90},
	Year = {2006},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272705000435},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.02.005}}

@techreport{Haddad_al:2020:BondCovid,
	Abstract = {We study disruptions in debt markets during the COVID-19 crisis. The safer end of the credit spectrum experienced significant losses that are hard to fully reconcile with standard default or risk premium channels. Corporate bonds traded at a large discount to their corresponding CDS, and this basis widened most for safer bonds. Liquid bond ETFs traded at a large discount to their NAV, more so for Treasuries, municipal bonds, and investment-grade corporate than high-yield corporate. These facts suggest investors tried to sell safer, more liquid securities to raise cash. These disruptions disappeared nearly as fast as they appeared. We trace this recovery back to the unprecedented actions the Fed took to purchase corporate bonds rather than its interventions in extending credit. The March 23rd announcement to buy investment-grade debt boosted prices and lowered bond spreads (particularly at shorter maturities and the safer end of investment-grade) while having virtually no effect on high-yield debt. April 9th, in contrast, had a large effect on both investment-grade and high-yield, even for the riskier end of high yield which would only indirectly benefit from the policy. These facts highlight the importance of financial frictions early on in the crisis, but also challenge existing theories of these frictions.},
	Author = {Haddad, Valentin and Moreira, Alan and Muir, Tyler},
	Date-Added = {2020-05-21 23:12:22 -0400},
	Date-Modified = {2020-05-21 23:12:39 -0400},
	Doi = {10.3386/w27168},
	Institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research},
	Month = {May},
	Number = {27168},
	Series = {Working Paper Series},
	Title = {When Selling Becomes Viral: Disruptions in Debt Markets in the COVID-19 Crisis and the Fed's Response},
	Type = {Working Paper},
	Url = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27168},
	Year = {2020},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w27168},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.3386/w27168}}
